Establishes the "PRAISE Act" prohibiting the closure of places of worship during an emergency
Summary
HB 1194 would create a new Missouri law called the “Protecting Religious Assembly in States of Emergency (PRAISE) Act.” The bill prohibits the state and its political subdivisions, during emergency declarations under chapter 44 or certain orders under section 192.020, from imposing restrictions on houses of worship that would make religious services impractical. It also provides that if other entities are exempt from an emergency declaration or order, religious places of worship must be exempt as well, and it states that emergency declarations and orders may not prohibit religious services held on private property.
The bill includes an exception for emergency evacuation orders tied to imminent danger from flooding, fires, tornadoes, earthquakes, terrorist threats, civil unrest, or hazardous materials incidents that apply generally to the affected area. Once the imminent danger has passed, religious services must be allowed to resume. If the state or a political subdivision violates the section, affected houses of worship may file a civil action seeking injunctive relief, compensatory damages, nominal damages, declaratory relief, and, where malice or recklessness is shown, punitive damages.
Impact
HB 1194 would add section 1.810 to Missouri law and create enforceable protections for religious services during emergencies. It would limit the ability of state and local governments to restrict worship services in emergency situations, while preserving authority for broadly applicable evacuation orders in specific imminent-danger scenarios. The bill also creates a private right of action for affected religious organizations, exposing the state or local governments to litigation and potential damages if they violate the new protections.
Sentiment
The available context suggests the bill is framed positively by supporters as a religious liberty measure, with the caption emphasizing that it would prohibit closure of places of worship during an emergency. No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, amendments, or recorded opposition in the supplied materials. Based on the text alone, the bill appears intended to protect faith communities from emergency restrictions rather than to regulate them.
Contention
The main point of contention is the balance between religious exercise and emergency public-safety authority. Supporters would likely favor the bill’s protection of worship services and equal treatment for houses of worship, while critics may argue it could limit state and local officials’ flexibility to respond to public health or safety emergencies. The exception for evacuation orders addresses some safety concerns, but the bill still allows lawsuits and damages claims, which could be controversial for governments managing emergencies.